Here is the official voting thread for PREFERENTIAL VOTING. First let me explain to ANY of you, exactaly WHAT Preferential voting is in case you don't understand.

Preferential voting is voting for the candidate you like most, down the the candidate you like least. So....instead of following the American tradition and voting for ONE person...like so:

I Vote for John Doe. (D)

Instead you would follow this procedure:

John Doe (D)Jack Smith (R)Frodo Baggins (I)Mel Gibson (JC)

That is what your ballot would look like under preferential voting.....ASSUMING that you want John Doe to win....and if John Doe doesn't win then you're fine with Jack Smith...but the LAST person you want to win is Mel Gibson of the "Jesus Christ Party" thus you name him last.

Ok....everyone understand now?

Here are the rules of voting:Vote YES or NO on preferential voting. Once you cast your vote....you cannot change it....because I have now explained what it is.....and there are NO other things to vote for like there was last time...which confused people. There is NO confusion now.

Now.....VOTE!

This thread will stay open from 8pm Friday EST......to 8pm Monday EDT.

“They cheated us again and again, made decisions behind our back, presenting us with completed facts. That’s the way it was with the expansion of NATO in the East, with the deployment of military infrastructure at our borders. They always told us the same thing: 'Well, this doesn't concern you.'" -Vladimir Putin

Preferential voting in no way goes against the principle of "One person, one vote"!"One person, one vote" means that everyone should be able to vote, and no one should have more votes than anyone else. How those votes are counted is irrelevant. I'm sure people in Australia would say that they believe in "one person, one vote". The principle is meant to counter INEQUALITY (like only people of one race being able to vote, or people with property having their weighted more). It embodies no claim about procedural specifics.

Don't you love how this is in.....WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE SCCCCCCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNN[/i] ??

Don't you love how this is in.....WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE SCCCCCCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNN[/i] ??

1) allows minor parties to actually be elected, on occasion2) means that any candidate must win a majority of votes to be elected, and therefore has a truly democratic mandate3) Allows everyone an equal vote, and means that the majority of votes elect the candidate4) Has worked so well in Australia that it has a Democratic Institution rating of 10.00*, as dpoes the US, a perfect score!5) Has a civil and Political Liberties rating of 6*, another perfect score the US shares. If the system was so overwhelmingly undemocratic, why would it get perfect scores?6) Is fairer to voters-their vote will always be important, no matter who they vote for

It works, its fairer, and it gives us an easier operation, considering we have three parties. Plus, it sticks to the basic criteria of "one man, one vote"-everyone only gets one vote, and they are all equal.

1) allows minor parties to actually be elected, on occasion2) means that any candidate must win a majority of votes to be elected, and therefore has a truly democratic mandate3) Allows everyone an equal vote, and means that the majority of votes elect the candidate4) Has worked so well in Australia that it has a Democratic Institution rating of 10.00*, as dpoes the US, a perfect score!5) Has a civil and Political Liberties rating of 6*, another perfect score the US shares. If the system was so overwhelmingly undemocratic, why would it get perfect scores?6) Is fairer to voters-their vote will always be important, no matter who they vote for

It works, its fairer, and it gives us an easier operation, considering we have three parties. Plus, it sticks to the basic criteria of "one man, one vote"-everyone only gets one vote, and they are all equal.